RIP Irrfan Khan

[Dolgopolov85]

Flying kites keeps you away from jail, no? (btw, I really like him lol) - srk has significant clout with the Gandhis too. At one point it was conjectured that he would field politics from that end. I think being political comes easy to actors. Voicing opinions hits their moolah. They prefer the latter and nothing wrong in that per se. Protecting own interests. Most would indeed do that.

I don't know if their marrying outside of their religious ideologies means much - Swami for instance is married to a Parsi and his daughter is married to a muslim. What I am getting to is that in this age of social media we jump to placing labels on people too easily and many reactions are too jarring as well.

End of the day sports or movies, at least I seek entertainment. You see what's happening to Sandgren for example. We expect too much from people I think, in general

Well, that's because Swami doesn't really believe in a Hindu Rashtra or any of the other nonsense he says for public consumption. He just has an axe to grind against the Gandhis, not without justification, and has thrown his lot in with the BJP. Swami used to be in United Front govts not so long ago and preached secularism etc then. OTOH for Muslims it's much rarer to marry outside their community and then to also not insist that their spouse change their name or religion.

 

[Azure]

Well, that's because Swami doesn't really believe in a Hindu Rashtra or any of the other nonsense he says for public consumption. He just has an axe to grind against the Gandhis, not without justification, and has thrown his lot in with the BJP. Swami used to be in United Front govts not so long ago and preached secularism etc then. OTOH for Muslims it's much rarer to marry outside their community and then to also not insist that their spouse change their name or religion.

Dunno, plenty of examples in Bollywood itself - Salim Khan, srk, amir, Pataudi, saif - all married outside their religion if they believed in one in the first place. They are not the common public and they would never face the issues felt by the average man in the country.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Dunno, plenty of examples in Bollywood itself - Salim Khan, srk, amir, Pataudi, saif - all married outside their religion if they believed in one in the first place. They are not the common public and they would never face the issues felt by the average man in the country.

I don't disagree there. It goes both ways. In the first place, being actors, they are already a lot more unconventional than the average Muslim and in the second, as you said, the privilege of being stars insulates them from the issues an ordinary Muslim would face.

 

[Sentinel]

Darn this ****ty year keeps getting ****tier

Rishi Kapoor today succumbs to cancer - one of the most charming actors to grace the screens. RIP

 

[sureshs]

I also watched Lunchbox. Very interesting movie. I just wish there were less cigarette scenes.

Art films are about life as it is, Pennease.

 

[sureshs]

.funny considering the deluge of scantily clad muslim women in bollywood ready to shed their outfits if it means putting more asses in the theatres.

Example? Katrina Kaif is from the UK. Who else today?

 

[sureshs]

You generalise too much. What you say is applicable for the three Khans (the stars) of whom Salman has particularly made sure to always appear on the side of whichever party is in power (he needs to, he should be in jail, as Trump would say). But it is not applicable for Javed Akhtar or Naseeruddin Shah; they have been outspoken and have taken heat from Twitter for doing so, especially in the current bizarre climate where Naseer is thought of as a terrorist by some because he played Ghulfam Hassan in Sarfarosh (yeah, not making this up). Irrfan didn't wade into either religion or politics one way or the other, so more like Sania Mirza.

Exactly. Asur does not seem to know about Javed and his wife Shabana, and their long fight against both Muslim and Hindu fundamentalism. She also doesn't see,m to know that Muslims like Sahir Ludhianwi the lyricist were regarded as communists and anti-Islam. Shabana's father, the poet Kaifi Azmi, as well as lyricists like Hazrat Jaipuri and Majrooh Sultanpuri were also notably in sync with Hindus and secular in their outlook.

 

[sureshs]

That is a different matter. My point was that Naseer or Javed weren't trying to play both sides and get the best of both worlds. Javed in particular has been atheist despite belonging to a religion where doing so attracts maximum heat. He has said he loves it when he gets criticised by hardliners from both sides because that means he must be doing something right. Javed was married to a Parsi at first before marrying Shabana and Naseer to Rathna Pathak. In that way, the Khans are also secular but they do more religious show sha because they have much more wealth and their agenda is different. Both Aamir and SRK did in fact voice criticism against intolerance early in Modi's tenure but seeing as it attracted too much backlash, they decided to play it cool. Salman OTOH moved very early to chant Modiji Modiji and stay on his right side.

The 3 Khans pretend to be friendly with Modi - they have no choice. Salman has claimed that he is both a Muslim and a Hindu.

 

[sureshs]

Dunno, plenty of examples in Bollywood itself - Salim Khan, srk, amir, Pataudi, saif - all married outside their religion if they believed in one in the first place. They are not the common public and they would never face the issues felt by the average man in the country.

That is why they also have to pretend to be religious - to appease those who are jealous of their money and their flouting of religious norms. They also use their influence to find jobs in the industry for Muslims. This is what they have to do in return for acceptance. Being secular will not cut it either with Muslims or Hindus.

That is why Javed and Shabana are so unique. They are free thinkers like me.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Exactly. Asur does not seem to know about Javed and his wife Shabana, and their long fight against both Muslim and Hindu fundamentalism. She also doesn't see,m to know that Muslims like Sahir Ludhianwi the lyricist were regarded as communists and anti-Islam. Shabana's father, the poet Kaifi Azmi, as well as lyricists like Hazrat Jaipuri and Majrooh Sultanpuri were also notably in sync with Hindus and secular in their outlook.

I don't recall the exact lyrics he wrote, but apparently Sahir Ludhianvi had written the first cut of lyrics for Ek Shahenshah Ne Banvaye Haseen Taj Mahal with a socialist slant that criticised the Emperor's expense on building a monument that was of no use to the poor. Naushad was incensed and sacked him, going back to his favourite Shakeel Badayuni.

 

[sureshs]

I don't recall the exact lyrics he wrote, but apparently Sahir Ludhianvi had written the first cut of lyrics for Ek Shahenshah Ne Banvaye Haseen Taj Mahal with a socialist slant that criticised the Emperor's expense on building a monument that was of no use to the poor. Naushad was incensed and sacked him, going back to his favourite Shakeel Badayuni.

Most of the monuments, temples, and churches of the past were built as indulgences by Kings who swindled money from the poor and used religion and national pride to keep them appeased.

Wait a minute that might be today too.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Here it is. I am quoting from Naushadnama, Raju Bharatan's book on Naushad. Below were the lyrics Sahir had written for Ek Shahenshah.

"Ek Shahenshah Ne Daulat Ka Sahara Lekar
Hum Gharibon Ki Mohabbat Ka Udaaaya Hai Mazaaq
Mere Mehboob Kahein Aur Milaa Kar Mujh Se"

 

[Azure]

Example? Katrina Kaif is from the UK. Who else today?

Huma Qureshi, Zarine Khan, sara khan, Nargis Fakhri....go a bit back and Jia Khan, a little further Parveen babi, zeenat aman, Farah, Mumtaz...the list is around. It's just the double standards that irked me when a hard working sportswoman was targetted while actresses were left to do whatever.

Exactly. Asur does not seem to know about Javed and his wife Shabana, and their long fight against both Muslim and Hindu fundamentalism. She also doesn't see,m to know that Muslims like Sahir Ludhianwi the lyricist were regarded as communists and anti-Islam. Shabana's father, the poet Kaifi Azmi, as well as lyricists like Hazrat Jaipuri and Majrooh Sultanpuri were also notably in sync with Hindus and secular in their outlook.

I still maintain that stars will play a safe game. They have to. The ones you name here are not stars. They are writers and poets too - intellectually on a different level from the stars. That said these guys are still not representative of the average muslim on the streets. Their issues are much more 'first world' if I may say so. That they voice their opinion is their choice. I don't necessarily think it is right or wrong. Everyone has the right to make a choice - As you rightly point out below...

That is why they also have to pretend to be religious - to appease those who are jealous of their money and their flouting of religious norms. They also use their influence to find jobs in the industry for Muslims. This is what they have to do in return for acceptance. Being secular will not cut it either with Muslims or Hindus.

I am a big fan of Shabana's work and respect Javed as a lyricist but where am I denying that they are not secular? I don't even hold any grouse. The stars are maintaining their image because their fame depends on it. Considering today's day and age of social media, a lot of energy can be wasted battling your political opinion.

 

[Azure]

I don't recall the exact lyrics he wrote, but apparently Sahir Ludhianvi had written the first cut of lyrics for Ek Shahenshah Ne Banvaye Haseen Taj Mahal with a socialist slant that criticised the Emperor's expense on building a monument that was of no use to the poor. Naushad was incensed and sacked him, going back to his favourite Shakeel Badayuni.

Thanks! Interesting anecdote. Naushad was one of the greatest music directors of Indian cinema. Shakeel and Naushad had developed a very ancient camaraderie with the success of music in films like Baiju Bawra. It is no surprise that he would pick him for lyrics - which movie was this for?

 

[Sentinel]

That is why Javed and Shabana are so unique. They are free thinkers like me.

What free thoughts do you have Sir?

Those that freely fall out of your head?

 

[Sentinel]

I also watched Lunchbox. Very interesting movie. I just wish there were less cigarette scenes.

Just watched it. There were not many cig scenes.
I think the movies of the 70s had a lot more. And don't get me started on the Hollywood movies of the 50s and earlier. Smoking is non stop there

 

[Sentinel]

Wonderful actor, saw lots of him several years ago when he had a recurring role on HBO psychotherapy drama "In Treatment"

Was it based on the life of Suresh, as the patient getting treatment ?

 

[1HBHfanatic]

-RIP

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Thanks! Interesting anecdote. Naushad was one of the greatest music directors of Indian cinema. Shakeel and Naushad had developed a very ancient camaraderie with the success of music in films like Baiju Bawra. It is no surprise that he would pick him for lyrics - which movie was this for?

This was for Leader. Which didn't run well and marked the beginning of Naushad's decline. I guess this is why they had wanted to include Sahir as lyricist because he was very popular in the 60s.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

About Irrfan's views, it seems he did used to speak out. We as Hindus didn't notice it, but the hardline among his co-religionists did and have been graceful enough to vent their feelings on the opportune occasion of his death.

Read this guy's answer on the question "What digusts you?"

https://www.quora.com/profile/Anshul-अंशुल-2

It did happen, he criticised animal sacrifice and got flak from clerics for doing so:

https://www.hindustantimes.com/jaip...t-sacrifice/story-7ScJoVPf3KzjMxqNEoFerI.html

More here:

https://www.organiser.org/Encyc/202...s-message-of-introspection-during-Ramzan.html

I always enjoyed his acting. I have more respect now in learning that he was not afraid to speak out, unlike his more illustrious fellow Muslim stars in Bollywood.

 

[Raul_SJ]

Irfan vs Irrfan.

Why was he so concerned about such a trivial name change?
His old name is actually much better. Never heard of anyone named Irrfan.

Irfan (also transliterated as Erfan, Arabic: عرفان‎) is an Arabic male given name. In Arabic, the name means "Knowledge", "Awareness" and "Learning".
Variant form(s): Erfan (Persian), İrfan (Turkish)
Meaning: "Knowledge, Wisdom"
Pronunciation: Arabic; Persian; Turkish
Wikipedia › wiki › Irfan_(name)

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Irfan vs Irrfan.

Why was he so concerned about such a trivial name change?
His old name is actually much better. Never heard of anyone named Irrfan.

Irfan (also transliterated as Erfan, Arabic: عرفان‎) is an Arabic male given name. In Arabic, the name means "Knowledge", "Awareness" and "Learning".
Variant form(s): Erfan (Persian), İrfan (Turkish)
Meaning: "Knowledge, Wisdom"
Pronunciation: Arabic; Persian; Turkish
Wikipedia › wiki › Irfan_(name)

Numerology and all that nonsense which lot of Indian celebs seem to subscribe to.

See how Raja's name is spelt in wiki, his current spelling:

Ilaiyaraaja - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And see here at 1:41:

On similar lines, all Rajesh Roshan produced movies have names starting with K - Khoon Bhari Mang, Karan Arjun, Kaho Na Pyar Hai, Koi Mil Gaya, Krissh, Kaabil. Some kind of superstition.

Even the outwardly rational may nevertheless have some such irrational weakness. Margaret Thatcher had apparently taken Indian guru Chandraswami's advice before the 1980 elections.

 

[Azure]

Numerology and all that nonsense which lot of Indian celebs seem to subscribe to.

See how Raja's name is spelt in wiki, his current spelling:

Ilaiyaraaja - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And see here at 1:41:

On similar lines, all Rajesh Roshan produced movies have names starting with K - Khoon Bhari Mang, Karan Arjun, Kaho Na Pyar Hai, Koi Mil Gaya, Krissh, Kaabil. Some kind of superstition.

Even the outwardly rational may nevertheless have some such irrational weakness. Margaret Thatcher had apparently taken Indian guru Chandraswami's advice before the 1980 elections.

I have always subscribed to the notion that religion and superstition are very different from each other. I know of so many athiests who wear all sorts of gemstones on them to yield fortune. Funnily enough, I know of ardenly religious people who don't believe in all of this because they believe that believing in such things is insult to their belief in the supreme entity. Humans are very complex beings. Cannot keep bucketing them. Being athiest does not mean one is rational and being religious doesn't mean one is a blundering fool either.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I have always subscribed to the notion that religion and superstition are very different from each other. I know of so many athiests who wear all sorts of gemstones on them to yield fortune. Funnily enough, I know of ardenly religious people who don't believe in all of this because they believe that believing in such things is insult to their belief in the supreme entity. Humans are very complex beings. Cannot keep bucketing them. Being athiest does not mean one is rational and being religious doesn't mean one is a blundering fool either.

Cannot disagree with a word in there. I had a live example at home. My grandfather was a physics professor but also recited Sanskrit/Tamil shlokas without fail every morning and was competent enough to perform the rituals for festivities like Ram Navmi/Janmashtami all of his own.

 

[Azure]

Cannot disagree with a word in there. I had a live example at home. My grandfather was a physics professor but also recited Sanskrit/Tamil shlokas without fail every morning and was competent enough to perform the rituals for festivities like Ram Navmi/Janmashtami all of his own.

That would be tons of people in today's time too. It's similar to how people at my home are (you'd find me that way too).

Funniest are politicians though. They aren't necessarily religious. They all look for votes and they'd do anything and everything to win - look at the rings on their fingers, their changed names (Jayalalithaa - the double a for example). A fiercely modernist woman like Indira used to wear rosary beads and make it a point to visit every important temple wherever she was campaigning. I don't think these people necessarily believed in a god. Anything to protect their fortunes and sway luck to their sides.

And the best counterexample is Yogi - a religious politician who is non superstitious...the first CM from UP to visit Noida - a tradition that says that any CM visiting has to resign. Mayawati, Yadav - all avoided visiting.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

That would be tons of people in today's time too. It's similar to how people at my home are (you'd find me that way too).

Funniest are politicians though. They aren't necessarily religious. They all look for votes and they'd do anything and everything to win - look at the rings on their fingers, their changed names (Jayalalithaa - the double a for example). A fiercely modernist woman like Indira used to wear rosary beads and make it a point to visit every important temple wherever she was campaigning. I don't think these people necessarily believed in a god. Anything to protect their fortunes and sway luck to their sides.

And the best counterexample is Yogi - a religious politician who is non superstitious...the first CM from UP to visit Noida - a tradition that says that any CM visiting has to resign. Mayawati, Yadav - all avoided visiting.

Speaking of politics, the people who between them inadvertently orchestrated the greatest religious gulf and conflagration of modern India (I speak of the events leading up to Babri Masjid demolition) were not religiously minded at all (Rajiv Gandhi and Arun Nehru) and naively believed they could appease both sides and work out a solution without appreciating the passions religion does evoke for those who derive their identity strongly from their religion.

 

[Azure]

Speaking of politics, the people who between them inadvertently orchestrated the greatest religious gulf and conflagration of modern India (I speak of the events leading up to Babri Masjid demolition) were not religiously minded at all (Rajiv Gandhi and Arun Nehru) and naively believed they could appease both sides and work out a solution without appreciating the passions religion does evoke for those who derive their identity strongly from their religion.

Yes, it was a massive blunder leading from the Shah Bano case.

As for bollywood - look at the name changes - kareena (kareina) to sanjay dutt (Sunjay), devgan (devgn) to Javed Jaffrey (Jaaved).... I don't think these guys are religious really.

 

[sureshs]

Cannot disagree with a word in there. I had a live example at home. My grandfather was a physics professor but also recited Sanskrit/Tamil shlokas without fail every morning and was competent enough to perform the rituals for festivities like Ram Navmi/Janmashtami all of his own.

That is not the same as believing in numerology, gem stones, or palmistry.

 

[sureshs]

Speaking of politics, the people who between them inadvertently orchestrated the greatest religious gulf and conflagration of modern India (I speak of the events leading up to Babri Masjid demolition) were not religiously minded at all (Rajiv Gandhi and Arun Nehru) and naively believed they could appease both sides and work out a solution without appreciating the passions religion does evoke for those who derive their identity strongly from their religion.

What solution did the people who appreciate religious sentiments come up with? Essentially signing off on the demolition and sanctioning a temple there, and asking Muslims to go build something elsewhere. That is total appeasement of one side, not some great appreciation of religious sentiments.

 

[Azure]

That is not the same as believing in numerology, gem stones, or palmistry.

Yes. Agree.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

What solution did the people who appreciate religious sentiments come up with? Essentially signing off on the demolition and sanctioning a temple there, and asking Muslims to go build something elsewhere. That is total appeasement of one side, not some great appreciation of religious sentiments.

You completely misunderstood what I am saying. I didn't say appreciating religious sentiments was the solution. Not entertaining the debate was, which was the approach both Nehru and Indira followed. But Rajiv had taken Sangh Parivar help in slaughtering Sikhs in 1984 riots and as a quid pro quo, appeased them on Ram Janmabhoomi.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

That is not the same as believing in numerology, gem stones, or palmistry.

Again, read with context. I didn't say it is the same as believing in numerology.

 

[Azure]

You completely misunderstood what I am saying. I didn't say appreciating religious sentiments was the solution. Not entertaining the debate was, which was the approach both Nehru and Indira followed. But Rajiv had taken Sangh Parivar help in slaughtering Sikhs in 1984 riots and as a quid pro quo, appeased them on Ram Janmabhoomi.

I read just the opposite. When the majority were against the Sikhs, it was a few RSS members and others like Vajpayee who were on the Sikh side. Let me look up for references.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I read just the opposite. When the majority were against the Sikhs, it was a few RSS members and others like Vajpayee who were on the Sikh side. Let me look up for references.

I read it in an article. Will look for the link, but would not be surprised by that at all as Congress went in a bizarre majoritarian direction in 1984 and then overbalanced with Shah Bano. Total mess.

 

[sureshs]

Again, read with context. I didn't say it is the same as believing in numerology.

You were talking about chanting mantras and doing rituals. Those went hand in hand with academics, especially in Brahmin circles. They used to write Physics books with a Gita quotation at the beginning of every chapter, like some did from the Bible in the West. Religion and Science were both considered scholarly pursuits. Astrology usually also was believed in, as it is very much linked to religion in HInduism.

But palmistry, numerology, crystals and ancient nadi leaves reading were often ridiculed by the same people. They were only partly rational and could not shed religion completely.

 

[Azure]

I read it in an article. Will look for the link, but would not be surprised by that at all as Congress went in a bizarre majoritarian direction in 1984 and then overbalanced with Shah Bano. Total mess.

This is Kushwant Singh's article I found on a quick search
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.outlookindia.com/magazine/amp/victory-to-the-mob/228338

What solution did the people who appreciate religious sentiments come up with? Essentially signing off on the demolition and sanctioning a temple there, and asking Muslims to go build something elsewhere. That is total appeasement of one side, not some great appreciation of religious sentiments.

To be fair, @Dolgopolov85 was citing the atmosphere that led to the disaster in the first place. Besides, people did not come up with a solution. The courts did.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

You were talking about chanting mantras and doing rituals. Those went hand in hand with academics, especially in Brahmin circles. They used to write Physics books with a Gita quotation at the beginning of every chapter, like some did from the Bible in the West. Religion and Science were both considered scholarly pursuits. Astrology usually also was believed in, as it is very much linked to religion in HInduism.

But palmistry, numerology, crystals and ancient nadi leaves reading were often ridiculed by the same people. They were only partly rational and could not shed religion completely.

The context was that a person can embrace both religion and science too. So I was not saying anything different from what you're bringing up now. Especially the highlighted part.

 

[sureshs]

This is Kushwant Singh's article I found on a quick search
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.outlookindia.com/magazine/amp/victory-to-the-mob/228338


To be fair, @Dolgopolov85 was citing the atmosphere that led to the disaster in the first place. Besides, people did not come up with a solution. The courts did.

The court came up with a ridiculous decision that contradicted its own premises in order to appease the Sangh parivar and to get Gogoi admitted into the Rajya Sabha after retirement.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

This is Kushwant Singh's article I found on a quick search
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.outlookindia.com/magazine/amp/victory-to-the-mob/228338

This was one of the articles that mention Sangh's complicity in the riots and anti-Sikh sentiment.

https://scroll.in/article/766550/rs...s-at-places-it-was-implicated-in-the-violence

 

[Dolgopolov85]

The court came up with a ridiculous decision that contradicted its own premises in order to appease the Sangh parivar and to get Gogoi admitted into the Rajya Sabha after retirement.

On this I agree, it's a tough question as to who is worse between Gogoi and Dredd Scott. Now, Mr Voilence, S A Bhobde is also in the running.

 

[sureshs]

The context was that a person can embrace both religion and science too.

Yes that was the way the older generations thought, all around the world. Which I don't sympathize with at all because these older generations were post-Darwin and he introduced a new way of thinking which these guys deliberately ignored, in spite of the availability of books about it even in their times. They learnt nothing from him.

 

[Azure]

The court came up with a ridiculous decision that contradicted its own premises in order to appease the Sangh parivar and to get Gogoi admitted into the Rajya Sabha after retirement.

Yeah that was terrible, wasn't it? Regardless, it's the decision by a bench- apparently done after enough research including excavations from ASI and more. The report ran into thousands of pages. Anyway, the decision always was more favoured towards building a temple...the eminent lawyer Fali Nariman mentions it in his fantastic book on lamdmark judicial cases - he cites even in that, that a temple was more likely - a full decade before bjp came to power. I wouldn't brush it aside so easily as a decision made merely to appease.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Yes that was the way the older generations thought, all around the world. Which I don't sympathize with at all because these older generations were post-Darwin and he introduced a new way of thinking which these guys deliberately ignored, in spite of the availability of books about it even in their times. They learnt nothing from him.

I don't particularly object to it as long as the irrationality doesn't lead such people to malignant positions. My grandfather supported his daughter's decision to marry a person outside caste and community whom she loved and never did the nonsense Brahmin orthodox stuff like making maids sit on the floor or maintaining separate cutlery etc. Many however take a view that their religion compels them to discriminate.

 

[sureshs]

I am changing my name to Surresh because I am a creative type who doesn't want to be confused with the masses of Sureshs out there.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Yeah that was terrible, wasn't it? Regardless, it's the decision by a bench- apparently done after enough research including excavations from ASI and more. The report ran into thousands of pages. Anyway, the decision always was more favoured towards building a temple...the eminent lawyer Fali Nariman mentions it in his fantastic book on lamdmark judicial cases - he cites even in that, that a temple was more likely - a full decade before bjp came to power. I wouldn't brush it aside so easily as a decision made merely to appease.

Even Allahabad HC decision proposed a three way division of the land. So yes, it would have happened even without BJP. But was it not appeasement? That I am not so sure of. Once you condone a breakdown of law and order in the name of religion and allow the culprits to get away and even get political power, the courts become wary of passing harsh decisions.

 

[Azure]

This was one of the articles that mention Sangh's complicity in the riots and anti-Sikh sentiment.

https://scroll.in/article/766550/rs...s-at-places-it-was-implicated-in-the-violence

Unlike the outlook article that Singh quotes with names, this article is a bit biased - look at this statement below.. Suppositions being printed can lead to dangerous assumptions, no?

The RSS-BJP, I suppose, felt that the assassination of Indira Gandhi was far more important than the massacre of Sikhs.

 

[Azure]

Even Allahabad HC decision proposed a three way division of the land. So yes, it would have happened even without BJP. But was it not appeasement? That I am not so sure of. Once you condone a breakdown of law and order in the name of religion and allow the culprits to get away and even get political power, the courts become wary of passing harsh decisions.

Oh yes, I am not denying that. I am saying it's not 'only' that. Gogoi being inducted after retirement is enough evidence of the not so independent judiciary after all.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Unlike the outlook article that Singh quotes with names, this article is a bit biased - look at this statement below.. Suppositions being printed can lead to dangerous assumptions, no?

The RSS-BJP, I suppose, felt that the assassination of Indira Gandhi was far more important than the massacre of Sikhs.

Well, it's an interview so that in the context, that is a fair expression. Sangh was also very clever to not reveal their hand during that time, as he says, and later turn it into a talking point against Cong when guilt over riots took over as anti Sikh sentiment faded.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Oh yes, I am not denying that. I am saying it's not 'only' that. Gogoi being inducted after retirement is enough evidence of the not so independent judiciary after all.

We will have to wait at least another 1 1/2 years for a strong CJI again - D Y Chandrachud. Don't know what more damage will be done by then.

 

[Azure]

Well, it's an interview so that in the context, that is a fair expression. Sangh was also very clever to not reveal their hand during that time, as he says, and later turn it into a talking point against Cong when guilt over riots took over as anti Sikh sentiment faded.

Yes. I do not have much facts about this though. I always assumed that RSS was not mobilised by Rajiv. Searches produce vastly opposing articles on the net.